There are a lot of scenarios where dealing for Revis doesn't make much sense, and I think it's a reason why the market for Revis at least appears to be cooling down a bit.

So that begs the question, at what point does the price make sense for Revis? The Seahawks didn't think that Flynn made sense for them when they thought he'd get Kolb money. When it became apparent this was not the case, that interest was ignited and Seattle ultimately pulled the trigger after viewing Flynn's situation as an opportunity. If the cost for Revis comes down enough, I think Seattle will have interest, the question is where would it begin to make sense?

First you have to determine how much Revis is actually worth. That leads me to a series of questions:

How will Revis play coming off an ACL injury?

A few years ago, the ACL injury probably would have killed Revis' trade value almost completely, but in recent years there have been many cases of players returning to full strength after such an injury. Adrian Peterson, Jamaal Charles, Eric Berry, etc. Revis has speed to spare (4.38 forty) and that seems to be the common link between those who bounced back the best from the injury. You can't rule out the impact completely, but it's not insane to think that you'd get Revis type production from Revis in 2013. The injury does increase the risk though, and will certainly effect the Jets' asking price.

How likely is Revis to be retained after 2013 and what might his market price be?

Revis can't be franchised after next season and is seeking an insane amount of money in free agency. Whichever team trades for Revis will have zero leverage in contract talks and it's considerably likely that Revis will hit open free agency next year. And if that happens, it's anyone's guess where he ends up. Overall, I'd say it's likely that whichever franchise trades for Revis is getting a rental.

That said, don't overlook the "upside" of actually landing Revis in a long term deal after 2013. Teams that make trades for rental types have generally enjoyed a bit of an inside track on getting the next contract. I think at least some of Revis' high demands come from the fact that he plays for a lousy Jets team and probably wants out. If Seattle makes a deep playoff run (which I think is pretty likely) and Revis believes he is on the NFL's best team, it's going to make it harder to take that slightly better offer from the Jacksonville Jaguars or Cleveland Browns next march. Revis is already very rich, and I think the next contract is really more of an ego thing. If you make him the highest paid corner, that might be enough.

The highest paid corners in the NFL made around $11 million last season. Revis wants $16 million a year. Maybe after a very positive experience in 2013, he might sign back in the $12-$14 million range. FWIW, when you compare Revis to other high paid NFL players, I think he justifies that kind of salary pretty easily. He's one of the most valuable non-QB players in the league. Or to look at it another way, is Revis worth as much as Zach Miller and Alan Branch combined? Because that's what $12 to 14 million in salary looks like. Of course, you don't want to lose essential players so we're just talking dollars in expendable/luxury players.

It would be nice if we had a "wins over replacement" type stat in football as they do in baseball, then the calculation of Revis' worth would be very easy. We don't, but consider that this is a league where Brandon Flowers, Leon Hall, Chris Gamble, DeAngelo Hall, Nnamdi Asomugha, and an old Champ Bailey all made $8 to $11 million at the cornerback position last season. A league where good #2 corners like Brandon Carr get 5/50 contracts.

I genuinely feel that if you get Revis back on a 5/60 or 5/70 contract (which would make him the highest paid corner in the league by a good margin), you are getting a more than solid return on your investment. If he proves healthy and as good as ever.

How much is Revis worth purely as a rental?

If you deal for Revis, what is a reasonable price in the event he's just a rental for one season? His cap hit is a reasonable $9 million in 2013. As expressed above, I think even $14 million is a fair price for a contributor of his magnitude. So his 2013 salary of $9 million is a plus, in my opinion.

Paying a 1st round pick in the event of a rental is far too much. I think a late 2nd rounder sounds about right though for a team that is front and center for the Superbowl discussion entering the 2013 season. To be clear, I think a late 2nd rounder is an overpay for one season of any player, but there is a higher chance to have Revis beyond 2013 if you trade for him and that added chance carries value.

I also think that 1 season of Revis carries a lot more value to a team like Seattle than it would to a middling team because it would make a hard team to beat even tougher. Even if Revis leaves, would anyone complain about burning the #64 pick if the Revis trade helped us win a Superbowl? In a worst case scenario, Seattle fails to win it all, Revis walks, and the pick is lost. That's not a good situation. So there's risk to weigh. I think the upside of winning a championship or keeping Revis long term counterbalances the risk of having a 2nd round pick potentially burned.

The Sherman / Revis dynamic

It's hard to tell how Revis and Sherman would coexist as teammates. I think they'd make up pretty quickly, as Sherman is really more of a joker than a jerk and Revis certainly didn't seem to be holding any grudges during his interview with Sherman teammate Michael Robinson.

It would be a really interesting competition dynamic to be sure, with both players competing for interceptions and big plays. I have to wonder if that very reason might be why Seattle was "highly interested" in Revis at the dawn of the trade talks. You know our coach loves competition, and a Revis-Sherman competition would be among the most epic in the history of the sport.

Having Revis on the field means more passes than usual will target Sherman, and vice versa. I think it would probably be a good thing forcing quarterbacks to throw more passes in Sherman's direction, as well as Revis'. The passer rating on passes targeting Sherman and Revis are absurdly low. Combine that with Browner/Thurmond covering the number three and four options, and you are looking at a secondary for the ages.

So here is where I think a trade begins to make sense for Seattle

Seattle trades a conditional 2014 pick. If Revis gets re-signed and remains with the Seahawks beyond the 2013 season, the Jets receive our 2014 1st round pick. If Revis signs with another team in free agency, the Jets receive a 2014 2nd round pick instead. If Revis proves his worth and signs an extension to remain here, he is easily worth a 1st round pick and the money we pay him, especially since that 1st round pick will probably be a very late one.

And before anyone flips out of the mythical value of a 1st round pick, consider the options Seattle had in the late first back in 2011, 2008, 2006, 2005, and 2004. Those picks turned into James Carpenter, Lawrence Jackson, Kelly Jennings, Chris Spencer, and Marcus Tubbs. You look at the late 1st round most years and it's not nearly as good as you might imagine. It's hardly a lock to get a star. Although I do love the late 1st this year, but that's beside the point and trust me, this year is pretty uncommon in it's depth.

And while I'm sure people are sick of hearing this, it's possible that the Jets could have a degree of interest in Matt Flynn as competition for Mark Sanchez and that could have a minor impact on the trade details as well.

Maybe the Jets get a better offer elsewhere. I am not saying that we must trade for Revis at all costs. But I think if an offer like this is possible, at this type of risk/reward, the balance of the deal becomes one worth making.

I've been wondering how many teams with a premiere CB in a big contract have been to the Super Bowl? I'll look into it when I have time, but if anyone knows offhand of a top-5-contract CB on a recent SB team, please share.

Revis & Sherman would be astoundingly awesome, but the overall price - especially when Sherman comes due - would drain the team I would think.

HawkAroundTheClock wrote:I've been wondering how many teams with a premiere CB in a big contract have been to the Super Bowl? I'll look into it when I have time, but if anyone knows offhand of a top-5-contract CB on a recent SB team, please share.

Revis & Sherman would be astoundingly awesome, but the overall price - especially when Sherman comes due - would drain the team I would think.

The best CB in NFL history, one of the highest paid mercenaries the NFL has ever seen, got a couple rings. Probably the closest comparison, and on a bunch of different levels. Charles Woodson two years ago. Since Deion, and without mentioning Sherman, have there really been any truly elite corners besides Woodson, Revis, and Asomugha? So, out of the last four elite, huge money CB's, half of them have rings. Ty Law. Chris McCallister.

A great QB is by far the most prevalent position group you see come up among Super Bowl Champions, but you can make a very strong argument that a strong secondary has been the second most.

Another killer post like usually buddy. The Alan Branch and Zach Miller bit was especially eye raising. It'd be an interesting dynamic for sure. .. I just don't know if it's worth the price in picks, cap space, etc just to upgrade our STRONGEST unit. It would be epic though. . That competition should be the best in the history of the game you are right about that. Nothing alike have came close to how intense that would be, Sherman ands Revis.

Anyone want to make me a new signature? I've held out hope long enough.95% of the time I'm viewing here and/or posting is being done on a mobile device. Pardon any spelling, punctuation, or grammar mistakes.

Kip, your idea makes sense for the Seahawks. Also, like Tical said, nobody is trading for Revis without having already negotiated a deal. And the Jets won't trade him for a conditional pick, what if your new rental player blows out his other knee and you don't re-sign him then? That scenario would never let the Jets do the deal for a conditional thing. The 2nd pick in the deal might be conditional, like the Alex Smith trade.

Right now, the Jets are treating his potential trade like his Franchise Tagged. Two firsts. That is where negotiations start. We have two problems. Number one, San Fran has more to spend in the draft than we do, and it is this year's picks they have to spend, not 2014. So your offer makes Seattle a leverage partner, and nothing else. With the desperate state of the coach in New York, 2014 picks might as well be 2025 picks. They need cheap players right now, not next year. There is no offer we can make that the Niners cannot outshine, unless players are part of the deal. And the Niners need him more than we do, so they would escalate us out of the talks. WHich is good, if they are going to trade for him, we need to make them pay for the privilege by making them overpay.

Here is my question to Kip. Stop trying to delay the pain of the trade by making it about 2014 picks. Would you trade this year's 1st and next year's conditional second for Revis? Or this year's second and next year's first? Or even our first two picks this year?

HawkAroundTheClock wrote:I've been wondering how many teams with a premiere CB in a big contract have been to the Super Bowl? I'll look into it when I have time, but if anyone knows offhand of a top-5-contract CB on a recent SB team, please share.

Revis & Sherman would be astoundingly awesome, but the overall price - especially when Sherman comes due - would drain the team I would think.

The best CB in NFL history, one of the highest paid mercenaries the NFL has ever seen, got a couple rings. Probably the closest comparison, and on a bunch of different levels. Charles Woodson two years ago. Since Deion, and without mentioning Sherman, have there really been any truly elite corners besides Woodson, Revis, and Asomugha? So, out of the last four elite, huge money CB's, half of them have rings. Ty Law. Chris McCallister.

A great QB is by far the most prevalent position group you see come up among Super Bowl Champions, but you can make a very strong argument that a strong secondary has been the second most.

Cool, good stuff. I looked at the past two seasons and top CB salaries:

Of the top 5 salaried CBs from each year (x2 years), 4 of the 10 (40%) made the playoffs: Champ Bailey both years, plus DeAngelo Hall and Johnathan Joseph in 2012. (EDIT: a different list I just saw had Dunta Robinson in the top 10, so that would make 5 of 10, 50%)

Of the top 10 salaries from each year, 7 of 20 (35%) made the playoffs. Total record of those teams: 5-7. The Giants accounted for 4 of those wins when they won the SB with the #9 CB that year, Corey Webster.

So, aside from the Giants, teams who made the playoffs with a top-10 salaried CB are 1-7 the past two years.

Also, the two teams with 2 CBs in the top 10 did not make the playoffs. (Jets in 2012, and Eagles in 2011)

It's a small sample size, 2 years, so I hope to go back further, but I don't have time now.

Everyone keeps talking about how much you have to pay Revis and how we don't need a CB. True we don't necessarily "Need" a CB as we likely already have the best Secondary in the game.

However lets take a look at what's coming up. Brandon Browner is also in the last year of his deal. He is going to want to be paid just as much as Revis will. So unless you plan on just letting him walk, starting a youngster and using that money somewhere else (which is a possibility) You'll have to pay someone.

I don't know about you all but if I have to pay both pretty big money I would certainly take the more talented and younger Revis over Browner.

I would love to see a player trade rather than Draft picks but that's just my preference. I understand where Kearly is coming from and think he has great points.

I would love to see something like this:Seahawks trade Matt Flynn and Brandon Browner for Revis.

I got jumped all over for this suggestion on another board, but if you look at contracts and numbers it actually makes a lot of sense. You would clear up the cap room of Flynn making the small increase in pay from Browner to Revis this year a non-factor.

Then at the end of this year (after winning the Super Bowl) you still have the same choice as you would with Browner. You have all your picks still and you can decide Do you want to pay him or let him walk... Same scenario, just with a better/younger player...

Not going to happen. Some smart poster pointed out it could damage the lockerroom bringing in a high-priced FA before the Shermans and ET's get new deals. Then, at least it seemed, JS hinted at that same dynamic.

As to some thinking trading for Revis would kill our cap, I'm just not so sure. With great cap guys, and I think the Hawks have done pretty well in this area, cap manipulation isn't so difficult. I think the cap situation is kind of blow out of proportion, personally. I read somewhere (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) that Flacco is set to make $30 mil next year but his cap hit is only $6.8 mil. It's easier to get around the cap than some might think.

DJrmb wrote:I would love to see something like this:Seahawks trade Matt Flynn and Brandon Browner for Revis.

I got jumped all over for this suggestion on another board, but if you look at contracts and numbers it actually makes a lot of sense. You would clear up the cap room of Flynn making the small increase in pay from Browner to Revis this year a non-factor.

Does it make sense from a Seahawks' financial standpoint? Yes, maybe. But the Jets are not going to make that deal. There is more to a trade than the cap hit. The Jets need to believe that having Flynn (2 starts and rumors off a bad arm) and a press corner like Browner makes it worthwhile to part with Revis.

DJrmb wrote:I would love to see something like this:Seahawks trade Matt Flynn and Brandon Browner for Revis.

I got jumped all over for this suggestion on another board, but if you look at contracts and numbers it actually makes a lot of sense. You would clear up the cap room of Flynn making the small increase in pay from Browner to Revis this year a non-factor.

Does it make sense from a Seahawks' financial standpoint? Yes, maybe. But the Jets are not going to make that deal. There is more to a trade than the cap hit. The Jets need to believe that having Flynn (2 starts and rumors off a bad arm) and a press corner like Browner makes it worthwhile to part with Revis.

Ask yourself:

"Would another team give up more for Revis?"

It's funny, I have gotten responses all over the spectrum on that idea now. The guys on the other thread all said I was an idiot because Flynn and Browner was too much to give for Revis. Now you say the opposite. I'm not 100% sure either way so maybe that means it's pretty close? IDK just a thought...

The premise that we get him for a conditional first rounder while really nice is not happening. You are going to pay at MINIMUM a guaranteed first rounder. The question is how many additional picks will be conditional

I realize that this was a "at what point is Revis worth it" but it simply isn't happening the way it was laid out

IMO the interest in Revis is similar to the interst in Manning last year. But, I doubt the Hawks would tie up that much of the payroll to upgrade a position that is already in pretty good shape. However, as has been pointed out, Browner could be too expensive to keep next year. That may mean that a good CB MAY BE in PC/JS's mind in the upper rounds (like rounds 2-4) for the Hawks draft this year? Thinking ahead one year, can Browner's replacement be found in this draft???? (Amerson comes to mind!)

DJrmb wrote:It's funny, I have gotten responses all over the spectrum on that idea now. The guys on the other thread all said I was an idiot because Flynn and Browner was too much to give for Revis. Now you say the opposite. I'm not 100% sure either way so maybe that means it's pretty close? IDK just a thought...

It's a bit of both. I don't think that offering Flynn and Browner is enough to get Revis from the Jets, and i think that adding Revis to this roster and crippling the salary cap is as valuable to this team as having Browner and a backup in Flynn. Even the best CB's can only cover a player for so long if a QB has all day to throw the ball. I'm also really of the opinion that Flynn isn't as valuable a trade commodity as we want him to be. Value comes in different forms. Trade value is one thing, value to current team is another.

I think my trouble with your reasoning is that you're approaching it from the Seahawks' perspective rather than the Jet's perspective. I think there is a greater chance that one of the other 30 teams in the NFL can offer more to the Jets for Revis than the Seahawks would be willing to part with. Revis is the exact kind of player that teams overpay for.

First, I don't think Revis fits out defensive plan or scheme. He may have been a shut down type corner (acl recovery will tell) but he is not a Pete Carroll, 6'4, 220lb Browner punch you in the mouth corner. Instead, he is Mike Holmgren, 5'11 195lb prototypical corner with a hurt wheel. Second, trading Browner and Flynn for a broke aging Revis is not moving the team forward but taking us 3 steps back in my opinion and would cost us way more.. Third, the reason why we aren't going to make any splash in the trade market is because we have the second most picks in the league already. PC has already said that it is going to be very, very difficult for a draftee to even make out team next year. So any more picks could be throw away's as we are so young and deep at so many positions. You don't trade away guys you know could make the team for guys who might not ever see the field.

With that I don't see any reasonable situation that makes him worth it.

First, I don't think Revis fits out defensive plan or scheme. He may have been a shut down type corner (acl recovery will tell) but he is not a Pete Carroll, 6'4, 220lb Browner punch you in the mouth corner. Instead, he is Mike Holmgren, 5'11 195lb prototypical corner with a hurt wheel.

I am tired of trying to fight this lie people have grasped onto, but I have already taken this up a few times on multiple threads. I am not trying to call you out or anything just your perception of Revis is false and incorrect. I'm not too sure where this "Revis is a small cover guy that's not physical" came from but it's so far from the truth. If you want to know more go check out some of the other Revis threads.

It's a bit of both. I don't think that offering Flynn and Browner is enough to get Revis from the Jets, and i think that adding Revis to this roster and crippling the salary cap is as valuable to this team as having Browner and a backup in Flynn. Even the best CB's can only cover a player for so long if a QB has all day to throw the ball. I'm also really of the opinion that Flynn isn't as valuable a trade commodity as we want him to be. Value comes in different forms. Trade value is one thing, value to current team is another.

The thing is the money would be basically exactly the same for this year. And then it would be comparable after that. Browner only has this year left on his deal just like Revis. Browner makes about 600k this year and Revis makes 3M. With the money you save on Flynn's contract you are actually saving money still. So it does not hurt you at all this year. And then after the year you have the same option with both Browner and Revis. Pay them or let them walk.

As for the Jets it really just depends on how much they like Browner and Flynn. If you think Flynn can be your starter then he's easily worth a 2nd or 3rd. Philly got a Probowl CB and a 2nd for Kolb... And Browner should probably be about the same, maybe more a 3rd. So it's kind of like a 2nd and a 3rd and no I really don't think anyone else would offer much more then that. Maybe someone offers a couple 2nds but I don't see (nor have I heard of any rumors yet) of anyone offering a 1st.

kearly wrote:There are a lot of scenarios where dealing for Revis doesn't make much sense, and I think it's a reason why the market for Revis at least appears to be cooling down a bit.

So that begs the question, at what point does the price make sense for Revis? The Seahawks didn't think that Flynn made sense for them when they thought he'd get Kolb money. When it became apparent this was not the case, that interest was ignited and Seattle ultimately pulled the trigger after viewing Flynn's situation as an opportunity. If the cost for Revis comes down enough, I think Seattle will have interest, the question is where would it begin to make sense?

First you have to determine how much Revis is actually worth. That leads me to a series of questions:

How will Revis play coming off an ACL injury?

A few years ago, the ACL injury probably would have killed Revis' trade value almost completely, but in recent years there have been many cases of players returning to full strength after such an injury. Adrian Peterson, Jamaal Charles, Eric Berry, etc. Revis has speed to spare (4.38 forty) and that seems to be the common link between those who bounced back the best from the injury. You can't rule out the impact completely, but it's not insane to think that you'd get Revis type production from Revis in 2013. The injury does increase the risk though, and will certainly effect the Jets' asking price.

How likely is Revis to be retained after 2013 and what might his market price be?

Revis can't be franchised after next season and is seeking an insane amount of money in free agency. Whichever team trades for Revis will have zero leverage in contract talks and it's considerably likely that Revis will hit open free agency next year. And if that happens, it's anyone's guess where he ends up. Overall, I'd say it's likely that whichever franchise trades for Revis is getting a rental.

That said, don't overlook the "upside" of actually landing Revis in a long term deal after 2013. Teams that make trades for rental types have generally enjoyed a bit of an inside track on getting the next contract. I think at least some of Revis' high demands come from the fact that he plays for a lousy Jets team and probably wants out. If Seattle makes a deep playoff run (which I think is pretty likely) and Revis believes he is on the NFL's best team, it's going to make it harder to take that slightly better offer from the Jacksonville Jaguars or Cleveland Browns next march. Revis is already very rich, and I think the next contract is really more of an ego thing. If you make him the highest paid corner, that might be enough.

The highest paid corners in the NFL made around $11 million last season. Revis wants $16 million a year. Maybe after a very positive experience in 2013, he might sign back in the $12-$14 million range. FWIW, when you compare Revis to other high paid NFL players, I think he justifies that kind of salary pretty easily. He's one of the most valuable non-QB players in the league. Or to look at it another way, is Revis worth as much as Zach Miller and Alan Branch combined? Because that's what $12 to 14 million in salary looks like. Of course, you don't want to lose essential players so we're just talking dollars in expendable/luxury players.

It would be nice if we had a "wins over replacement" type stat in football as they do in baseball, then the calculation of Revis' worth would be very easy. We don't, but consider that this is a league where Brandon Flowers, Leon Hall, Chris Gamble, DeAngelo Hall, Nnamdi Asomugha, and an old Champ Bailey all made $8 to $11 million at the cornerback position last season. A league where good #2 corners like Brandon Carr get 5/50 contracts.

I genuinely feel that if you get Revis back on a 5/60 or 5/70 contract (which would make him the highest paid corner in the league by a good margin), you are getting a more than solid return on your investment. If he proves healthy and as good as ever.

How much is Revis worth purely as a rental?

If you deal for Revis, what is a reasonable price in the event he's just a rental for one season? His cap hit is a reasonable $9 million in 2013. As expressed above, I think even $14 million is a fair price for a contributor of his magnitude. So his 2013 salary of $9 million is a plus, in my opinion.

Paying a 1st round pick in the event of a rental is far too much. I think a late 2nd rounder sounds about right though for a team that is front and center for the Superbowl discussion entering the 2013 season. To be clear, I think a late 2nd rounder is an overpay for one season of any player, but there is a higher chance to have Revis beyond 2013 if you trade for him and that added chance carries value.

I also think that 1 season of Revis carries a lot more value to a team like Seattle than it would to a middling team because it would make a hard team to beat even tougher. Even if Revis leaves, would anyone complain about burning the #64 pick if the Revis trade helped us win a Superbowl? In a worst case scenario, Seattle fails to win it all, Revis walks, and the pick is lost. That's not a good situation. So there's risk to weigh. I think the upside of winning a championship or keeping Revis long term counterbalances the risk of having a 2nd round pick potentially burned.

The Sherman / Revis dynamic

It's hard to tell how Revis and Sherman would coexist as teammates. I think they'd make up pretty quickly, as Sherman is really more of a joker than a jerk and Revis certainly didn't seem to be holding any grudges during his interview with Sherman teammate Michael Robinson.

It would be a really interesting competition dynamic to be sure, with both players competing for interceptions and big plays. I have to wonder if that very reason might be why Seattle was "highly interested" in Revis at the dawn of the trade talks. You know our coach loves competition, and a Revis-Sherman competition would be among the most epic in the history of the sport.

Having Revis on the field means more passes than usual will target Sherman, and vice versa. I think it would probably be a good thing forcing quarterbacks to throw more passes in Sherman's direction, as well as Revis'. The passer rating on passes targeting Sherman and Revis are absurdly low. Combine that with Browner/Thurmond covering the number three and four options, and you are looking at a secondary for the ages.

So here is where I think a trade begins to make sense for Seattle

Seattle trades a conditional 2014 pick. If Revis gets re-signed and remains with the Seahawks beyond the 2013 season, the Jets receive our 2014 1st round pick. If Revis signs with another team in free agency, the Jets receive a 2014 2nd round pick instead. If Revis proves his worth and signs an extension to remain here, he is easily worth a 1st round pick and the money we pay him, especially since that 1st round pick will probably be a very late one.

And before anyone flips out of the mythical value of a 1st round pick, consider the options Seattle had in the late first back in 2011, 2008, 2006, 2005, and 2004. Those picks turned into James Carpenter, Lawrence Jackson, Kelly Jennings, Chris Spencer, and Marcus Tubbs. You look at the late 1st round most years and it's not nearly as good as you might imagine. It's hardly a lock to get a star. Although I do love the late 1st this year, but that's beside the point and trust me, this year is pretty uncommon in it's depth.

And while I'm sure people are sick of hearing this, it's possible that the Jets could have a degree of interest in Matt Flynn as competition for Mark Sanchez and that could have a minor impact on the trade details as well.

Maybe the Jets get a better offer elsewhere. I am not saying that we must trade for Revis at all costs. But I think if an offer like this is possible, at this type of risk/reward, the balance of the deal becomes one worth making.

Just having a Secondary like that, you have a quandry for any Quarterback we'd play against, because they would undoubtedly have to alter their pass options to a dump off, or short game, because the back end of the field would be constricted severly ,AND, it would cause some hesitation in their decission ,which would help the Defensive line to make plays by just a few seconds

The Jets should expect a minimum of two high draft picks for Revis. How many teams are really willing to give up their first, second and a high pick next year? The salary cap is going to be close to flat over the next few years and teams have to look at contracts down the road or they will find themselves cutting veterans to get under the cap.

Finally, a trade could happen if Revis lowers his demands, the Jets lower their demands, and a trading club doesn't want to wait for him to come free in 2014. Revis had 14 interceptions in his first three years in the NFL and five picks in the last three years. I might want to use my draft picks on young players, watch Revis in 2013 to see if he shows up with his present contract and plays well coming off the ACL. If all goes well, then get in a bidding war for his services in 2014.

DJrmb wrote:Everyone keeps talking about how much you have to pay Revis and how we don't need a CB. True we don't necessarily "Need" a CB as we likely already have the best Secondary in the game.

You pretty much answered your own scenario here.

The reason that the Seahawks have "The Best Secondary In The Game" is because the physical Mauler "Browner" is on that Secondary.He is being dismissed by some as being border line with skills, and that just isn't true...There isn't a gigantic drop off as some are suggesting.His jambing at the line, screws up the timing of a LOT of Quarterback/Receiver plays.Steve Smith was stifled by Sherman last Year, and he lost his cool and flustered, slammed Sherman ( getting flagged ), BUT, could you imagine Smith trying something like that with Browner?

I like Browner, I really do. I know going on about Revis probably makes me sound like I don't. I think Browner brings a lot to the team and is a solid CB opposite Sherman. And actually I have never even been a big Revis fan. But there is no way I can agree with people that think Browner is better than Revis.

Again, not trying to bash Browner but do you remember when he served his suspension? The Defense didn't miss a beat and actually seemed to get a little better in pass protection.

Revis is not just some small cover corner like the perception out there. He is a strong and physical guy who is known for much more than just picking the ball. He's one of the best tacklers and run defenders at his position as well. He just does everything excellent. He's an all around type of guy.

Why do you think Browner wasn't on Steve Smith to begin with? He just doesn't have the quickness/speed to handle that type of guy. He is limited. Revishas the ability to cover any WR in the NFL (at least he did before his injury).

DJrmb wrote:As for the Jets it really just depends on how much they like Browner and Flynn. If you think Flynn can be your starter then he's easily worth a 2nd or 3rd. Philly got a Probowl CB and a 2nd for Kolb... And Browner should probably be about the same, maybe more a 3rd. So it's kind of like a 2nd and a 3rd and no I really don't think anyone else would offer much more then that. Maybe someone offers a couple 2nds but I don't see (nor have I heard of any rumors yet) of anyone offering a 1st.

Don't you think the Kolb trade has made teams more weary to enter this kind of deal? Same with Carson Palmer and to a lesser extent Whitehurst. Teams simply aren't going to pay you top dollar for a backup QB in a trade right now. I feel the Chiefs overpaid for Alex Smith, but you're not going to convince me that Flynn is worth a comparable amount to Alex Smith in a 2nd round pick. There are years of tape on Smith for a team to make up there mind. You still only have what, 2 games to make up your mind on Flynn?

Personally i think of Browner as a pro-bowler in our system, but i don't think he could have success in any system.

Revis to Seattle is just wishful thinking and our salary cap is better spent elseware.

Scottemojo wrote:Kip, your idea makes sense for the Seahawks. Also, like Tical said, nobody is trading for Revis without having already negotiated a deal. And the Jets won't trade him for a conditional pick, what if your new rental player blows out his other knee and you don't re-sign him then? That scenario would never let the Jets do the deal for a conditional thing. The 2nd pick in the deal might be conditional, like the Alex Smith trade.

Right now, the Jets are treating his potential trade like his Franchise Tagged. Two firsts. That is where negotiations start. We have two problems. Number one, San Fran has more to spend in the draft than we do, and it is this year's picks they have to spend, not 2014. So your offer makes Seattle a leverage partner, and nothing else. With the desperate state of the coach in New York, 2014 picks might as well be 2025 picks. They need cheap players right now, not next year. There is no offer we can make that the Niners cannot outshine, unless players are part of the deal. And the Niners need him more than we do, so they would escalate us out of the talks. WHich is good, if they are going to trade for him, we need to make them pay for the privilege by making them overpay.

Here is my question to Kip. Stop trying to delay the pain of the trade by making it about 2014 picks. Would you trade this year's 1st and next year's conditional second for Revis? Or this year's second and next year's first? Or even our first two picks this year?

I think you missed the point of this thread. Don't worry, everyone did.

This thread is about where the Seattle Seahawks draw the line. It's about deciding what is the maximum cost for Revis where a trade starts to make sense from Seattle's vantage point. If that maximum price is beat out by another team, then sayonara Revis. Best of luck in Cleveland or whatever shithole wants you too much.

I am also not quite sure a contract extension with the trade is a slam dunk either. Revis is asking for $16 million, and he seems like the type that would go to the open market to prove his point if you disagree with him. This difficulty could end up killing Revis' trade value, since teams aren't going to give that kind of money and Revis probably isn't going to sign for less outside of hitting free agency. If you trade for Revis, you are probably getting a rental unless you are just fine with paying him crazy money.

As you showed with that Kirwan article, it's the Jets who are in the tough position here. Trading Revis for two high picks is tough the same way that trading Browner for two high picks would be. But if you lower the demands, it gets easier. It's all about pricing. At a certain price, eventually a team or two will decide he's worth it. If you offered Revis for a 3rd rounder straight up every other team in the NFL would be on the phone.

Last edited by kearly on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, Kip, If that is the Seahawks POV, and top price, why would they even bother calling the Jets? If you don't want to spend money, don't go to the store, right? A conditional 2nd for Revis is more like waiting by the dumpster for the store to throw out yesterday's produce.

The Jets are better off just keeping him for his 6 million this year, offering him a nice deal before free agency 2014 when the inevitable cut of Mark Sanchez frees up cap space.

I think a 1st this year is fair compensation, but i think there could be a conditional pick given back to the team if say Revis gets injured or does not resign with the team, but if he stays healthy and resigns with the team they shoudl ahve to give up another 3rd.

Scottemojo wrote:Well, Kip, If that is the Seahawks POV, and top price, why would they even bother calling the Jets? If you don't want to spend money, don't go to the store, right? A conditional 2nd for Revis is more like waiting by the dumpster for the store to throw out yesterday's produce.

The Jets are better off just keeping him for his 6 million this year, offering him a nice deal before free agency 2014 when the inevitable cut of Mark Sanchez frees up cap space.

Maybe the Jets just don't want to pay Revis at all? In that scenario, getting whatever they can makes sense. It's the same rationale as the Tapp/Wilson/Sims trades when John Schneider first came here.

I'm guessing Idzik is looking at his roster and realized that he's operating a sinking ship. He needs to blow it up and get what he can from the salvaged parts.

I personally don't view Revis as yesterday's produce. And Seattle wouldn't approach the Jets with the offer I have in mind, they'd approach with something lower, and draw the line at (in this scenario) a conditional 1st. Maybe the Jets will get a better offer. If so, oh well, you tried. That's how these things go. No harm in exploring options that might help your team.

Scottemojo wrote:This thread is about where the Seattle Seahawks draw the line.

I got this but the full problem with this is that we (should) draw the line WAY before it even becomes remotely possible to get Revis.

There is no way period that we spend the money to get Revis with the long term implications so the discussion is like having a thread about where we draw the line for signing Aaron Rodgers next year when he is a FA........

Wenhawk wrote:but i think there could be a conditional pick given back to the team if say Revis gets injured or does not resign with the team, but if he stays healthy and resigns with the team they shoudl ahve to give up another 3rd.

Wenhawk wrote:but i think there could be a conditional pick given back to the team if say Revis gets injured or does not resign with the team, but if he stays healthy and resigns with the team they shoudl ahve to give up another 3rd.

Can you give me a single example of this happening before?

Nope, but I can't think of a time when a team is trying to get a 1st round + for a gy coming off an ACL injury. A more typicaly trade would be a 2nd this year and depending on his production a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd next year as a conditional. Say 1st if he makes the pro bowl, 2nd if he starts 14 games, and 3rd as the starting point.

I wouldn't even trade a 1st for him. Unknown level of play after an injury he might fully recover from, or be a shell of his former self from. Different story if he never got injured. I'd say a 2nd, considering the risk.

Revis would obviously be an upgrade over Browner, but Browner's a pretty good CB. Waste of money. We're able to roll cap space over again this year, right?